"Religion of 6 million"? Sorry I don't speak Nazi, you'll have to elaborate.

You seem not to understand how news works. Population figures are quoted all the time, and its common for one news source to use figures presented by another. If the AP wire comes out with a story that mentions a number like that, then it will end up being duplicated across many other news. It's not complicated.

Are you saying the number of 6 million was inaccurate? Where's your evidence of that, if so?

How about the indoctrination of all western children into thinking Nazi's are LITERALLY evil, and if you even dare to so much as question the holy narrative presented to you, you are immediately branded a monstrous anti-Semite .. How do you justify the shaming of children for inquiring after the truth?

You seem not to understand how news works. Population figures are quoted all the time, and its common for one news source to use figures presented by another. If the AP wire comes out with a story that mentions a number like that, then it will end up being duplicated across many other news. It's not complicated.

Are you saying the number of 6 million was inaccurate? Where's your evidence of that, if so?

Did you even watch the video? You don't find that all a bit too coincidental? "Population figures are quoted all the time"... for a purpose it seems...

If the number is so accurate, then why do holocaust denial laws exist?

Void_X_Zero wrote:Are you saying the number of 6 million was inaccurate? Where's your evidence of that, if so?

Yes, it is inaccurate. I personally watched the number grow from 2 million to 4 million a couple of years later, to 6 million a couple of years still later. And that was 25 years after the war. So unless you believe that they magically found another 4 million bodies 25 years later, the number "6 million" is a lie.

But there has been a reason for that lie. The number "6 million" shows up as a required number in ancient scripture, qualifying the "holocaust", without which returning to their ancient land was not yet permitted. And I'm sure that it is no coincidence that the raise in number occurred immediately after the UN declaration that for each non-combatant killed in a war, the violating country was to pay the violated country $97,000. Germany is still paying on that retro-active declared 582 Billion dollar debt to Israel (even though Israel didn't even exist at the time).

And that has been far from the greatest lie still being promoted on the subject. You live in the Land of Lies.

Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic HarmonyElseFrom THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is"..

How about the indoctrination of all western children into thinking Nazi's are LITERALLY evil, and if you even dare to so much as question the holy narrative presented to you, you are immediately branded a monstrous anti-Semite .. How do you justify the shaming of children for inquiring after the truth?

I do not justify shaming children for inquiring after the truth. Nor do I justify shaming the German people, as they are shamed today, because of what happened in WWII.

But neither do I pretend that Nazi Germany was some kind of great and wonderful thing. This is the main problem with people who get drawn into this conspiracy stuff, they are polarized, black and white thinkers without the ability to see a middle ground. Either the Nazis were Pure Evil Itself, or... no wait, if that is a little overblown then it must be the case that the Nazi's were... good! Lol, well, sorry but life doesn't work that way. Nazi Germany was a shitty, tyrannical ethnic nationalism that brutally ignored the needs of its own people (how else do you think they got that military machine built so quickly, on a struggling economy?), engaged in absolute censorship and propaganda with no recognition of even basic human rights, murdered millions in death camps (whether the number is more like 2-3 million or 6 million is irrelevant, and anyway they murdered more people than just Jews), and started a land war with the aim of taking over Europe.

Yeah. But let's ignore all that because western society wants to make sure we never forget what happened there. Or because Germans are still shamed today for supposed generational guilt (which I already said I do not agree with). Or because western society doesn't want to talk about atrocities and deaths in the USSR (which were far higher than in Nazi Germany) because of how the USSR still sort of represents the idea of a model communism for modern leftists.

You seem not to understand how news works. Population figures are quoted all the time, and its common for one news source to use figures presented by another. If the AP wire comes out with a story that mentions a number like that, then it will end up being duplicated across many other news. It's not complicated.

Are you saying the number of 6 million was inaccurate? Where's your evidence of that, if so?

Did you even watch the video? You don't find that all a bit too coincidental? "Population figures are quoted all the time"... for a purpose it seems...

If the number is so accurate, then why do holocaust denial laws exist?

Holocaust laws are not the only laws against free speech in some places in Europe. Anti-free speech laws in places like Germany or the UK cover anything "racist" or "bigoted" (as defined by the current status quo politically correct line) and are used to prosecute people who say anything "mean" about either Judaism or Islam (no one really cares if you say mean things about Christians). I agree that laws against Holocaust denial are stupid, but I agree that laws against free speech are stupid in general (the EU does not have freedom of speech, such as the United States has... one reason Europe is in such deep trouble right now with the immigration issue).

The irony is that laws against freedom of speech actually make things like Holocaust denial stronger over time, because they suppress the impulse to believe in that direction and prevent that impulse from being more properly released in discourse, challenged and openly refuted. Silencing speech only makes the silenced speech stronger. But that is something leftists of all stripes do not understand.

I'll take note that you presented no evidence that the "6 million" number is inaccurate. And again, I do not really care if the number is 2 million or 6 million, either way it is quite bad. It would not surprise me if official numbers were manipulated later on for political purposes, because that happens all the time. But even if that did occur, the Holocaust did happen and Holocaust denial is stupid.

A bit of a broader perspective here (I admit I'm not studied on these points regarding the specific number, so I gathered what appear to be a few legit sources, feel free to dispute them or offer other sources that you consider legit),

"1. What proof exists that the Nazis practiced genocide or deliberately killed six million Jews?

The IHR says (original, Samisdat, and revised versions combined):

None. The only evidence is the postwar testimony of individual "survivors." This testimony is contradictory, and no "survivor" claims to have actually witnessed any gassing. There are no contemporaneous documents and no hard evidence whatsoever: no mounds of ashes, no crematoria capable of disposing of millions of corpses, no piles of clothes, no human soap, no lamp shades made of human skin, no records, no credible demographic statistics.

Nizkor replies:

Lie piled upon lie, with not a shred of proof.

This is as good a place as any to present some detailed evidence which is consistently ignored, as a sort of primer on Holocaust denial. It will make this reply much longer than the other sixty-five, but perhaps the reader will understand the necessity for this.

Let's look at their claims one at a time:

Supposedly the only evidence, "the postwar testimony of individual survivors."First of all, consider the implicit conspiracy theory. Notice how the testimony of every single inmate of every Nazi camp is automatically dismissed as unconvincing. This total dismissal of inmates' testimony, along with the equally-total dismissal of the Nazis' own testimony (!), is the largest unspoken assumption of Holocaust-denial.

This assumption, which is not often spelled out, is that the attempted Jewish genocide never took place, but rather that a secret conspiracy of Jews, starting around 1941, planted and forged myriad documents to prove that it did; then, after the war, they rounded up all the camp survivors and told them what to say.

The conspirators also supposedly managed to torture hundreds of key Nazis into confessing to crimes which they never committed, or into framing their fellow Nazis for those crimes, and to plant hundreds of documents in Nazi files which were never discovered until after the war, and only then, in many cases, by sheer luck. Goebbels' diary, for example, was barely rescued from being sold as 7,000 pages of scrap paper, but buried in the scattered manuscript were several telling entries (as translated in Lochner, The Goebbels Diaries, 1948, pp. 86, 147-148):

February 14, 1942: The Führer once again expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism about it. The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them. Their destruction will go hand in hand with the destruction of our enemies. We must hasten this process with cold ruthlessness.

March 27, 1942: The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only 40 per cent can be used for forced labor.

Michael Shermer has pointed out that the Nazis' own estimate of the number of European Jews was eleven million, and sixty percent of eleven million is 6.6 million. This is fairly close to the actual figure. (Actually, forty percent was a serious overestimate of the survival rate of Jews who were captured, but there were many Jews who escaped.)

In any case, most of the diary is quite mundane, and interesting only to historians. Did the supposed Jewish conspiracy forge seven thousand pages to insert just a few lines? How did they manage to know Goebbels' affairs intimately enough to avoid contradictions, e.g. putting him or his associates in the wrong city at the wrong date?

As even the revisionist David Cole has admitted, revisionists have yet to provide a satisfactory explanation of this document.

Regarding postwar testimony from Nazis, were they all tortured into confessing to heinous crimes which they supposedly did not commit? This might be believable if only a few Nazis were captured after the war, or maybe if some had courageously stood up in court and shouted to the world about the supposed attempt to silence them. But hundreds testified regarding the Holocaust, in trials dating from late 1945 until the 1960s. (For example, see Böck, Hofmann, Hössler, Klein, Münch, and Stark.)

Many of these Nazis testified as witnesses and were not accused of crimes. What was the basis for their supposed coercion?

Many of these trials were in German courts. Did the Germans torture their own countrymen? Well, Holocaust-deniers sometimes claim that the Jews have secretly infiltrated the German government and control everything about it. They prefer not to talk too much about this theory, however, because it is clearly on the lunatic fringe.

The main point is that not one of these supposed torture victims -- in fifty years, not one -- has come forth to support the claim that testimony was coerced.

On the contrary, confirmation and reconfirmation of their testimony has continued across the years. What coercion could have convinced Judge Konrad Morgen to testify to the crimes he witnessed at the International Nuremberg Trial in 1946, where he was not accused of any crime? And to later testify at the Auschwitz trial at Frankfurt, Germany, in 1963-65? What coercion was applied to SS Doctor Johann Kremer to make him testify in his own defense in 1947, and then, after having been convicted in both Poland and Germany, emerge after his release to testify again as a witness at the Frankfurt trial? What coercion was applied to Böck, Gerhard Hess, Hölblinger, Storch, and Wiebeck, all former SS men, all witnesses at Frankfurt, none accused of any crime there?

Holocaust-deniers point to small discrepancies in testimonies to try to discredit them. The assumption, unstated, is that the reader will accept minor discrepancies as evidence of a vast, over-reaching Jewish conspiracy. This is clearly ludicrous.

In fact, the discrepancies and minor errors in detail argue against, not for, the conspiracy theory. Why would the conspirators have given different information to different Nazis? In fact, if all the testimonies, from the Nazis' to the inmates', sounded too similar, it is certain that the Holocaust-deniers would cite that as evidence of a conspiracy.

What supposed coercion could reach across four decades, to force former SS-Untersturmführer Dr. Hans Münch to give an interview, against the will of his family, on Swedish television? In the 1981 interview, he talked about Auschwitz:

Interviewer: Isn't the ideology of extermination contrary to a doctor's ethical values?

Münch: Yes, absolutely. There is no discussion. But I lived in that environment, and I tried in every possible way to avoid accepting it, but I had to live with it. What else could I have done? And I wasn't confronted with it directly until the order came that I and my superior and another one had to take part in the exterminations since the camp's doctors were overloaded and couldn't cope with it.

Interviewer: I must ask something. Doubters claim that "special treatment" could mean anything. It didn't have to be extermination.

Münch: "Special treatment" in the terminology of the concentration camp means physical extermination. If it was a question of more than a few people, where nothing else than gassing them was worthwhile, they were gassed.

Interviewer: "Special treatment" was gassing?

Münch: Yes, absolutely.

And what supposed coercion could reach across four decades, to force former SS-Unterscharführer Franz Suchomel into giving an interview for the film Shoah? Speaking under (false) promises of anonymity, he told of the crimes committed at the Treblinka death camp (from the book Shoah, Claude Lanzmann, 1985, p. 54):

Interviewer: You are a very important eyewitness, and you can explain what Treblinka was.

Suchomel: But don't use my name.

Interviewer: No, I promised. All right, you've arrived at Treblinka.

Suchomel: So Stadie, the sarge, showed us the camps from end to end. Just as we went by, they were opening the gas-chamber doors, and people fell out like potatoes. Naturally, that horrified and appalled us. We went back and sat down on our suitcases and cried like old women.

Each day one hundred Jews were chosen to drag the corpses to the mass graves. In the evening the Ukrainians drove those Jews into the gas chambers or shot them. Every day!

Ask the deniers why they shrug off the testimony of Franz Suchomel. Greg Raven will tell you that "it is not evidence...bring me some evidence, please." Others will tell you that Suchomel and Münch were crazy, or hallucinating, or fantasizing.

But the fantasy is obviously in the minds of those who choose to ignore the mass of evidence and believe instead in a hypothetical conspiracy, supported by nothing but their imaginations.

That total lack of evidence is why the "conspiracy assumption" almost always remains an unspoken assumption. To our knowledge, there has not been one single solitary "revisionist" paper, article, speech, pamphlet, book, audiotape, videotape, or newsletter which provides any details about this supposed Jewish/Zionist conspiracy which did all the dirty work. Not one.

At best, the denial literature makes veiled references to the World Jewish Congress perpetuating a "hoax" (in Butz, 1976) -- no details are provided. Yet the entire case of Holocaust-denial rests on this supposed conspiracy.

As for the testimony of the survivors, which the "revisionists" claim is the only evidence, there are indeed numerous testimonies to gassings and other forms of atrocities, from Jewish inmates who survived the camps, and also from other inmates like POWs. Many of the prisoners that testified about the gassing are not Jewish, of course. Look for instance at the testimony of Polish officer Zenon Rozansky about the first homicidal gassing in Auschwitz, in which 850 Russian POWs were gassed to death, in Reitlinger, The Final Solution, p. 154:

Those who were propped against the door leant with a curious stiffness and then fell right at our feet, striking their faces hard against the concrete floor. Corpses! Corpses standing bolt upright and filling the entire corridor of the bunker, till they were packed so tight that it was impossible for more to fall.

Which of the "revisionists" will deny this? Which of them was there? Which of them has the authority to tell Rozansky what he did or did not see?

The statement that "no 'survivor' claims to have actually witnessed any gassing" is clearly false; this was changed to "few survivors" in later versions, which is close to the truth.

But we do not need to rely solely on testimony, from the survivors, Nazis, or otherwise. Many wartime documents, not postwar descriptions, specifically regarding gassings and other atrocities, were seized by the U.S. armed forces. Most are in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.; some are in Germany.

If it has rained for instance for only one half hour, the van cannot be used because it simply skids away. It can only be used in absolutely dry weather. It is only a question now whether the van can only be used standing at the place of execution. First the van has to be brought to that place, which is possible only in good weather. ...

The application of gas usually is not undertaken correctly. In order to come to an end as fast as possible, the driver presses the accelerator to the fullest extent. By doing that the persons to be executed suffer death from suffocation and not death by dozing off as was planned. My directions now have proved that by correct adjustment of the levers death comes faster and the prisoners fall asleep peacefully.

And Just wrote of the gas vans to Rauff, on June 5, 1942, in a letter marked both "top secret" and "only copy". This is a horrific masterpiece of Nazi double-talk, referring to killing as "processing" and the victims as "subjects" and "the load." (See Kogon, Nazi Mass Murder, 1993, pp. 228-235.)

Since December 1941, for example, 97,000 were processed using three vans, without any faults occurring in the vehicles. ...

The normal capacity of the vans is nine to ten per square meter. The capacity of the larger special Saurer vans is not so great. The problem is not one of overloading but of off-road maneuverability on all terrains, which is severely diminished in this van. It would appear that a reduction in the cargo area is necessary. This can be achieved by shortening the compartment by about one meter. The problem cannot be solved by merely reducing the number of subject treated, as has been done so far. For in this case a longer running time is required, as the empty space also needs to be filled with CO [the poison exhaust gas]. ...

Greater protection is needed for the lighting system. The grille should cover the lamps high enough up to make it impossible to break the bulbs. It seems that these lamps are hardly ever turned on, so the users have suggested that they could be done away with. Experience shows, however, that when the back door is closed and it gets dark inside, the load pushes hard against the door. The reason for this is that when it becomes dark inside, the load rushes toward what little light remains. This hampers the locking of the door. It has also been noticed that the noise provoked by the locking of the door is linked to the fear aroused by the darkness.

Slip-ups occurred in written correspondence regarding the gas chambers themselves, some of which, fortunately, escaped destruction and were found after the war. A memo written to SS man Karl Bischoff on November 27, 1942 describes the gas chamber in Krema II not with the usual mundane name of "Leichenkeller," but rather as the "Sonderkeller" "special cellar."

And two months later, on January 29, 1943, Bischoff wrote a memo to Kammler, referring to that same chamber as the "Vergasungskeller." (See Gutman, Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, 1994, pp. 223, 227.) "Vergasungskeller" means exactly what it sounds like: "gassing cellar," an underground gas chamber.

Holocaust-deniers turn to Arthur Butz, who provides a specious explanation for the Vergasungskeller: "Vergasung," he says, cannot refer to killing people with gas, but only to the process of converting a solid or liquid into gas. Therefore, he says the "Vergasungskeller," must have been a special room where the fuel for the Auschwitz ovens was converted into gas -- a "gasification cellar."

There are three problems with this explanation. First, "Vergasung" certainly can refer to killing people with gas; Butz does not speak German and he should not try to lecture about the language. Second, there is no room that could possibly serve this function which Butz describes -- years after writing his book, he admitted this, and helplessly suggested that there might be another building somewhere in the camp that might house a gasification cellar. Third, the type of oven used at Auschwitz did not require any gasification process! The ovens burned solid fuel. (See Gutman, op. cit., pp. 184-193.)

So what does the term "gassing cellar" refer to? Holocaust-deniers have yet to offer any believable explanation.

An inventory, again captured after the war, revealed fourteen showerheads and one gas-tight door listed for the gas chamber in Krema III. Holocaust-deniers claim that room was a morgue; they do not offer to explain what use a morgue has for showerheads and a gas-tight door. (See a photograph of the document, or Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation, 1989, pp. 231, 438.)

We take this occasion to refer to another order of March 6, 1943, for the delivery of a gas door 100/192 for Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III, Bw 30a, which is to be built in the manner and according to the same measure as the cellar door of the opposite Krema II, with peep hole of double 8 millimeter glass encased in rubber. This order is to be viewed as especially urgent....

Why would morgues have urgently needed peepholes made out of a double layer of third-of-an-inch-thick glass?

The question of whether it can be proved that the cyanide gas was used in the Auschwitz gas chambers has intruiged the deniers. Their much-heralded Leuchter Report, for example, expends a great deal of effort on the question of whether traces of cyanide residue remain there today. But we do not need to look for chemical traces to confirm cyanide use (Gutman, op. cit., p. 229):

Letters and telegrams exchanged on February 11 and 12 [1943] between the Zentralbauleitung and Topf mention a wooden blower for Leichenkeller 1. This reference confirms the use of the morgue as a gas chamber: Bischoff and Prüfer thought that the extraction of air mixed with concentrated prussic acid [cyanide] (20 g per cu m) required a noncorroding ventilator.

Bischoff and Prüfer turned out to be wrong, and a metal fan ended up working acceptably well. But the fact that they thought it necessary demonstrates that cyanide was to be routinely used in the rooms which deniers call morgues. (Cyanide is useless for disinfecting morgues, as it does not kill bacteria.)

Other captured documents, even if they don't refer directly to some part of the extermination process, refer to it by implication. A captured memo to SS-Brigadeführer Kammler reveals that the expected incineration capacity of the Auschwitz ovens was a combined total of 4,756 corpses per day (see a photograph of the document or Kogon, op. cit., p. 157).

Deniers often claim that this total could not be achieved in practice (see question 45). That's not the point. These crematoria were carefully designed, in 1942, to have sufficient capacity to dispose of 140,000 corpses per month -- in a camp that housed only 125,000. We can conclude that massive deaths were predicted, indeed planned-for, as early as mid-1942. A camp designed to incinerate its full capacity of inmates every four weeks is not merely a detention center.

Finally, apart from the abundant testimonies, confessions, and physical evidence of the extermination process, there is certainly no want of evidence of the Nazis' intentions and plans.

But what should be done with the Jews? Do you think they will be settled down in the 'Ostland' [eastern territories], in [resettlement] villages? This is what we were told in Berlin: Why all this bother? We can do nothing with them either in the 'Ostland' nor in the 'Reichkommissariat.' So liquidate them yourself.

Gentlemen, I must ask you to rid yourself of all feeling of pity. We must annihilate the Jews, wherever we find them and wherever it is possible, in order to maintain the structure of the Reich as a whole. ...

We cannot shoot or poison these 3,500,000 Jews, but we shall nevertheless be able to take measures, which will lead, somehow, to their annihilation....

That we sentence 1,200,000 Jews to die of hunger should be noted only marginally.

Himmler's speech at Posen on October 4, 1943 was captured on audiotape (Trial of the Major War Criminals, 1948, Vol. XXIX, p. 145, trans. by current author):

I refer now to the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish people. This is one of those things that is easily said: "the Jewish people are being exterminated," says every Party member, "quite true, it's part of our plans, the elimination of the Jews, extermination, we're doing it."

The extermination effort was even mentioned in at least one official Nazi court verdict. In May 1943, a Munich court wrote in its decision against SS-Untersturmführer Max Taubner that:

The accused shall not be punished because of the actions against the Jews as such. The Jews have to be exterminated and none of the Jews that were killed is any great loss. Although the accused should have recognized that the extermination of the Jews was the duty of Kommandos which were set up especially for this purpose, he should be excused for considering himself to have the authority to take part in the extermination of Jewry himself.

And Hitler spoke quite clearly in public on no fewer than three occasions. On January 30, 1939, seven months before Germany invaded Poland, he spoke publicly to the Reichstag (transcribed from Skeptic magazine, Vol. 2, No. 4, p. 50):

Today I want to be a prophet once more: if international finance Jewry inside and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into another world war, the consequence will not be the Bolshevation of the earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe.

By the way, this last phrase is, in German, "die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in Europa," which German-speakers will realize is quite unambiguous.

In September, 1942:

...if Jewry should plot another world war in order to exterminate the Aryan peoples in Europe, it would not be the Aryan people which would be exterminated but Jewry...

On November 8, 1942:

You will recall the session of the Reichstag during which I declared: if Jewry should imagine that it could bring about an international world war to exterminate the European races, the result will not be the extermination of the European races, but the extermination of Jewry in Europe. People always laughed about me as a prophet. Of those who laughed then, countless numbers no longer laugh today, and those who still laugh now will perhaps no longer laugh a short time from now.

There are many other examples of documents and testimonies that could be presented.

Keep in mind that the IHR's answer to "what proof exists?" is "none." It has certainly been demonstrated already that this pat answer is totally dishonest. And this is the main point we wish to communicate: that Holocaust-denial is dishonest.

We continue by analyzing the remaining, more-specific, claims about what evidence supposedly does not exist.

"No mounds of ashes" is an internal contradiction. In an article in the journal published by the same IHR that publishes these Q&A, the Journal's editor reported that a Polish commission in 1946 found human ash at the Treblinka death camp to a depth of over twenty feet. This article is available on The IHR's web site.(Apparently some survivors claimed that the corpses were always thoroughly cremated. Because uncremated human remains were mixed with the ash, the editor suggested that the testimonies were false. Amazingly, he had no comment on how a twenty-foot layer of human ashes came to be there in the first place. Perhaps he felt that to be unworthy of mention.)

There are also piles of ashes at Maidanek. At Auschwitz-Birkenau, ashes from cremated corpses were dumped into the rivers and swamps surrounding the camp, and used as fertilizer for nearby farmers' fields.

"No crematoria" capable of disposing of millions of corpses? Absolutely false, the crematoria were more than capable of the job, according to both the Nazis' own internal memos and the testimony of survivors. Holocaust-deniers deliberately confuse civilian, funeral-home crematoria with the huge industrial ovens of the death camps. This is discussed in much detail in the replies to questions 42 and 45."No piles of clothes"? Apparently, the IHR considers piles of clothes to be "hard evidence"! This is strange, because they do not deny the other sorts of piles found at Nazi camps: piles of eyeglasses, piles of shoes (at Auschwitz, Belzec, and Maidanek), piles of gold teeth, piles of burned corpses, piles of unburned corpses, piles of artificial limbs (see Swiebocka, Auschwitz: A History in Photographs, 1993, p. 210), piles of human hair (ibid, p. 211), piles of ransacked luggage (ibid, p. 213), piles of shaving-brushes (ibid, p. 215), piles of combs (ibid), piles of pots and pans (ibid), and yes, even the piles of clothes (ibid, p. 214) that the IHR claims do not exist.Perhaps the authors of the 66 Q&A realized that it was dangerous for them to admit that these piles were hard evidence, because then they would also be forced to admit a number of other things as "hard evidence." Perhaps this is why they removed this phrase from the revised 66 Q&A.

If items were not generally found in mass quantities, it is only because the Nazis distributed them to the German population. A memo on this was captured, revealing that they even redistributed women's underwear.

"No human soap"? This is true, but misleading. Though there is some evidence that soap was made from corpses on a very limited experimental scale, the rumored "mass production" was never done, and no soap made from human corpses is known to exist. However, there is sworn testimony, never refuted, from British POWs and a German army official, stating that soap experiments were performed, and the recipe for the soap was captured by the Allies. To state flatly that the Nazis did not make soap from human beings is incorrect."No lamp shades made of human skin?" False -- lampshades and other human-skin "ornaments" were introduced as evidence in both trials of Ilse Koch, and were shown to a U.S. Senate investigation committee in the late 40s. We know they were made of human skin because they bore tattoos, and because a microscopic forensic analysis of the items was performed. (A detailed page on this is being prepared.)"No records"? This is nonsense (which may explain why this claim was removed from the "revised" versions of the 66 Q&A). True, extermination by gassing was always referred to with code-words, and those victims who arrived at death camps only to be immediately gassed were not recorded in any books. But there are slip-ups in the code-word usage that reveal the true meanings, as already described. There are inventories and requisitions for the Krema which reveal items anomalous with ordinary use but perfect for mass homicidal gassing. There are deportation train records which, pieced together, speak clearly. And so on. Several examples have been given above."No credible demographic statistics"? This is the second internal contradiction -- see question 2 and question 15. The Anglo-American committee who studied the issue estimated the number of Jewish victims at 5.7 million. This was based on population statistics. Here is the exact breakdown, country by country:Germany 195,000Austria 53,000Czechoslovakia 255,000Denmark 1,500France 140,000Belgium 57,000Luxemburg 3,000Norway 1,000Holland 120,000Italy 20,000Yugoslavia 64,000Greece 64,000Bulgaria 5,000Rumania 530,000Hungary 200,000Poland 3,271,000USSR 1,050,000Less dispersed refugees (308,000)Total number of Jews killed 5,721,500(This estimate was arrived at using population statistics, and not by adding the number of casualties at each camp. These are also available -- for instance, a separate file with the ruling of a German court regarding the number of victims in Treblinka is available. The SS kept rather accurate records, and many of the documents survived, reinforced by eyewitness accounts).

Some estimates are lower, some are higher, but this is the magnitude in question. In an article in CMU's student newspaper, the head of CMU's History Department, Peter Stearns, is quoted as saying that newly discovered documents -- especially in the former USSR -- indicate that the number of victims is higher than six million. Other historians claim not much over five million. The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust uses 5,596,000 as a minimum and 5,860,000 as a maximum (Gutman, 1990, p. 1799).

In summary:"Revisionists" often claim, correctly, that the burden of proof is on historians. The proof, of course, has been a matter of public record since late 1945, and is available in libraries around the world. The burden has been met, many, many times over. You've just seen a brief presentation of some of the highlights of that immense body of proof; much more is readily available.

To even argue that the Holocaust never happened is ludicrous. To claim straight-faced that none of this proof even exists is beyond ludicrous, and it is a clear example of "revisionist" dishonesty." http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar01.html(The links didn't transfer here, but go there and you will find many links citing the claims made here)

"This is difficult to assert. I know quite a lot about Judaism as a result of my interest in jewish history (particularly the theories about anti-Semitism), but the '6,000,000' does not come directly from the Talmud (which one? Babylonian: I presume?). You see the '6,000,000' number has two potentially sources as I understand it: population statistics or the rabbinical concept of the Guzma ('exaggeration'). Both arguments are largely conjectural unfortunately since as far as I know there has been no clear evidence as from whence the early '6,000,000' claims (they date as early as 1881/1882, possibly earlier, if memory serves) took their number. It is one of those underresearched, but vital, areas that one occasionally finds in any branch of scholarly inquiry.

Now the population argument is that it was asserted (I've never found an exact source for this) that there were roughly 6,000,000 jews living in the Russian Empire in the 1880s (or possibly just the Pale of Settlement). It needs to be remembered that this has been tabulated using religious criteria so when a jew converts to Christianity, be it Catholic or one of the Orthodoxies, then he or she is no longer reckoned to be a jew. I am not sure about jewish atheists, but I presume the Russian authorities still classified them as jews given their general association of atheism with satanism (i.e. opposition to and/or denial of Christianity). Anyway: so according to this argument, which is conjectural as far as I know, there were 6,000,000 jews, i.e. followers of Judaism, in Imperial Russia at this time hence the claim.

Now in the Judaism argument the concept of the 'Guzma' comes of importance. The 'Guzma' is a rabbinical concept, which is used to express the scale of a catastrophe ('shoah'), i.e. the number of jews who have suffered and/or died, in terms related to the tales of the Written Torah. Now the 'Guzma' relies on the Talmud Bavli (I forget the precise citations as the thing is huge) in so far as it calculates the extent of a 'shoah' by taking the number of jews the Bavli says came out of Egypt with Moses in the Torah (600,000) and then multiplies it by a number to express how serious and awful a 'shoah' the event is (from what I've read usually 1 to 10 given that jewish audiences became less accepting of insane figures at least as early as the 19th century). Thus 600,000 x 10 = 6,000,000 (i.e a truly biblical shoah). So in this argument we have rabbis explaining the scale of a 'shoah', which they cannot know, by using the concept of the 'Guzma' to create a number which can then be passed along to other rabbis around the world as a representation of the scale of the 'shoah' which has occurred or is occurring: hence the '6,000,000' claim.

Both arguments certainly have some truth to them and it is, in my opinion, probable that both had a hand in creating the '6,000,000' as a means of explaining the scale of the 'pogroms' (localised anti-Semitic riots would be far more accurate as they weren't government sponsored despite the still common assertion made on the basis of Simon Dubnow's work in the 1930s). However in the context of the 'caust: I think we have to suggest that the latter is of far more importance than the former in terms of influence as the former would have changed considerably by 1941-1945, while the latter was maintained in Judaism.

If you go looking for the concept of the 'Guzma' and other associated concepts: you will probably have a hard time finding them. I didn't even know they existed until I stumbled across a reference to them and another jewish custom (Lashon Hakmah ['The Language of the Wise']) in an obscure 1929 translation and explanation of the 'Tales of Rabbah-bar-bar-Hannah' by J. D. Eisenstein, in which he mentions and explains it in passing in order to explain one of Rabbah-bar-bar-Hannah's veiled stories.

The numerology arguments you should really leave out as these are from jewish mysticism (the most famous example of which is the Zohar) and operate as a different, sometimes opposing, tradition to the halakah and aggadah of the Mishnah and the two Talmuds (the Talmudists and the Kabbalists have and still do spend a lot of time fighting each other on various points of Judaism). In essence arguing the '6,000,000' comes from the numerology arguments is absurd, because most rabbis are not kabbalists or mystics [hence place little value in numerology] and certainly jewish mysticism had little to no impact on the orthodox and secular jews (I include the conservative and reform jews as secular) who were at this time (and still are) the mainstay of Judaism and the jewish community. Thus I cannot see how you can maintain that jews created a '6,000,000' figure out of special regard for the number '6' as it would have been near impossible to spread such a number as the ultra-Orthodox are not known for their friendliness and social networking amongst non-ultra-Orthodox jews.

Slightly off-topic (I apologise): don't use Hoffman on Judaism. He isn't a good source and he has a long history of distorting (and even simply making up) things about Judaism and jews in general (for example there is a G.I. Joe character, Dragonsky, listed as a jew in his 'Judaic Communists' article, which gets routinely quoted on anti-Semitic sites and by anti-Semites in general). Hoffman is largely plagiarising (in terms of arguments, which he then tries to try and add modern sources to support even if reading the literature proves them to be bogus [for example the 'raping of three year old girls', which he probably got from reading August Roehling's, 1885 [I think], 'Der Talmudjude' or the doubled [in size and content] French translation and addition by one of Drumont's associates]) Johann Andreas Eisenmenger's 1700 'Entdecktes Judenthum' (Judaism Uncovered), who, unlike Hoffman, actually spoke Hebrew (as far as I know Hoffman doesn't speak Hebrew or Yiddish despite citing sources in both languages) and was an expert in his subject [which Hoffman despite being well read and a quote farmer isn't by any measure]. It is worth picking up the English translation of Eisenmenger (which Hoffman has recently reprinted and charges an outrageous $200 for [you can pick up an original German first ed. for $1700-2000]) rather than buying Hoffman's 'Judaism Discovered' or 'Judaism's Strange God's'." http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?p= ... e9b#p41788

"illion EditFurther information: The_Holocaust § Jewish_death_tollThe figure of "six million" (which refers only to Jewish victims, and is larger when counting the other ethnic, religious, and minority groups targeted for extinction) is often minimized by such claims to a figure of only 1 million deaths,[by whom?] or only 300,000 deaths.[by whom?] By contrast, the vast majority of scholars, institutions, and even Nazi officials[67] estimate between five and six million Jews perished during the Holocaust,[68] while some claim the number could possibly be even higher.[69] With over 3 million Jewish victims' names collected by Yad Vashem,[70] numerous documents and archives discovered after the war gave meticulous accounts of the exterminations that took place at the death camps (such as Auschwitz and Treblinka).[71] The Nizkor project conducted a thorough research about this claim as well, and found the number of Jewish death to be at least 5.65 million.[72]

Deniers claim that these documents are based on Soviet propaganda, primarily from Ilya Ehrenburg's Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee, and are therefore unreliable. Complicating the matter is that various instances have been reported where the death tolls of particular death camps were claimed to be overstated. These claims vary in verifiability and objectivity. A much-quoted instance of disputing the toll is the "Breitbard Document" (actually a paper by Aaron Breitbart),[73] which describes a commemorative plaque at Auschwitz to the victims that died there, which read, Four million people suffered and died here at the hands of the Nazi murderers between the years 1940 and 1945. In 1990, a new plaque replaced the old one. It now says, May this place where the Nazis assassinated 1,500,000 men, women and children, a majority of them Jews from diverse European countries, be forever for mankind a cry of despair and of warning. The lower numbers are due to the fact that the Soviets "purposely overstated the number of non-Jewish casualties at Auschwitz-Birkenau," according to the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Holocaust deniers insist that the number of Jews killed therefore be lowered by at least 2.5 million. However, the plaque had never been used as an accurate historical source by mainstream historians.[74][75][76] As early as the 1950s, Raul Hillberg estimated 1.1 million Jewish deaths in Auschwitz.[77]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critici ... ust_denial

The intentional genocide of Jewish people under the Nazis is a sickening crime, as genocide anywhere is sickening. Just as sickening is pretending it didn't happen, merely to suit one's own pathological ideological desires to defend something indefensible for the sake of feeling part of a little conspiratorial clique of those who really "get it".

Check your ideology at the door, please.

Last edited by UrGod on Mon Jul 24, 2017 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Once again, I'm not a nazi. I view politics and government with disdain, skepticism, and disbelief. I'm a hyper ego driven individualist/opportunist. If I was in national socialist Germany believe me they wouldn't like me. I'd be the guy scavaging for weapons selling it all on the underground black market making a pretty penny for myself through wartime. The only thing I might have in common is that I support ethnic and cultural identity that's about it. That's as far as my commonality goes with that ideology. I'm a tribalist who believes modern nations will split a part some point in the future fracturing where mini-states are an inevitability. Definitely not your traditional state nationalist by any stretch of imagination.

Setting the record straight here.

Last edited by Otto_West on Mon Jul 24, 2017 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.

The point being here that Europe needs to die. The Ash and Elm extinction points to this also. The "White Race" as a European hub of life is gone.

Joker (Otto) and his banal superficiality, and all these skin deep puss-forms that masquerade as humans, the disastrous deprivation that they represent has bearing on the entire caucasian race; its standards have been lowered beyond the point of no return. In as far as heritage is concerned, it can only be purified by decimation.

There is no way forward for the white race. It is destroying itself from the inside out, slandering its most noble proponents with a degree of cowardice that hasn't ever existed in the history of mankind. The cowardice is enabled by the internet, and it is having its repercussions in the form of a destabilizing of the core. What nazism couldn't destroy for Odin, the internet racists are terminating.

Its fitting that the Ash-disease took hold around 2001, at the outset of the internet age. It looks like were going to have to ride this down until there is just a small pocket of seeds left, from which we can grow again.

I do not judge all "white" people (there is no such thing as a "white" person anyway, or a "white race") or rather all European descended peoples by the actions of a few of their most depaved individuals, such as these modern Nazis or the Nazi leftists in the EU. Just as I do not judge all Africans by the actions of some few of the worst Africans, or all Arabs by the actions of some few of the worst Arabs, or all Jews by the actions of some few of the worst Jews.

Judging an entire group only in terms of a small minority of that group is non-philosophical. It is the same premise that allows Nazism to continue to exist. That premise turned in any direction is bad.

If the EU would fall apart and a few more European nations get real leaders, like are in Poland and Hungary for example, then things would turn around. The European people who do not speak out are indeed guilty of perpetuating the problems in Europe, but when you lack free speech and live in a Big Brother society you aren't able to speak out unless you simply choose not to value your life and your family's life anymore, which most people are not able to do.

Poland and Hungary were nations harbouring the very worst nazis. It is no wonder that at this point they are the worst anti-Arab racists, as well. It is not out of virtue that they refuse these people. It is simply more lucrative for their leaders to placate racists than liberals.

The US will become a mixing pot of Euro, Latin, Asian and African humanity, it is in no danger of the sort to which Europe is falling. Europe can not mix races, its white population is too sordid and insolent for it, it is not generous enough to give of itself, and too petty to trust.

It is a shit-pit.

It is literally laughable, a continent that must derive its last hope for survival from Poland. The fact that this can actually be said now says enough - any such statement is equal to a eulogy.

As for freedom of speech: that has never existed in Europe. Laws against certain types of speech are perpetually pervasive and ubiquitous there. In my experience, furthermore, and Ive have traveled the continent very extensively, it is only a minute minority of people that is not fascistic in its a priori intuitions.

Sauwelios is one out of perhaps 5 people I know there who have been able to keep their heads above the fascistic swamp of European intellect.

::

To compare my analysis to nazism is a fallacy, as I do not advocate extermination. I simply see that the white race has no future in Europe. It is too weak. It will persist as a third rate humanoid animal in a huge working camp, but it will not come to rulership anymore.

Are you suggesting that Polish people helped the Nazis? That seems untrue.

"The occupation of Poland by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union during the Second World War (1939–1945) began with the German-Soviet invasion of Poland in September 1939, and formally concluded with the defeat of Germany by the Allies in May 1945. Throughout the entire course of foreign occupation, the territory of Poland was divided between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union (USSR) with the intention of eradicating Polish culture and subjugating its people by occupying German and Soviet powers.[1] In summer-autumn of 1941 the lands annexed by the Soviets were overrun by Nazi Germany in the course of the initially successful German attack on the USSR. After a few years of fighting, the Red Army was able to repel the invaders and drive the Nazi forces out of the USSR and across Poland from the rest of Central and Eastern Europe.

Both occupying powers were equally hostile to the existence of sovereign Poland, Polish culture and the Polish people, aiming at their destruction.[2] Before Operation Barbarossa, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union coordinated their Poland-related policies, most visibly in the four Gestapo-NKVD Conferences, where the occupants discussed plans for dealing with the Polish resistance movement and future destruction of Poland.[3]

About 6 million Polish citizens—nearly 21.4% of Poland's population—died between 1939 and 1945 as a result of the occupation,[4][5][6] half of whom were Polish Jews. Over 90% of the death toll came through non-military losses, as most of the civilians were targeted by various deliberate actions by Germans and the Soviets.[4] Overall, during German occupation of pre-war Polish territory, 1939–1945, the Germans murdered 5,470,000–5,670,000 Poles, including nearly 3,000,000 Jews.[5][6]"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupat ... land_(1939–1945)

Poland was a site of tremendous conflict and death, being right next to Nazi Germany and also the USSR.

"The Soviet invasion of Poland was a Soviet military operation that started without a formal declaration of war on 17 September 1939. On that morning, 16 days after Nazi Germany invaded Poland from the west, the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the east. The invasion and the battle lasted for the following 20 days and ended on 6 October 1939 with the two-way division and annexation of the entire territory of the Second Polish Republic by both Germany and the Soviet Union.[7] The joint German-Soviet invasion of Poland was secretly agreed to in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed on 23 August 1939.[8]

The Red Army, which vastly outnumbered the Polish defenders, achieved its targets by using strategic and tactical deception. Some 230,000 Polish prisoners of war had been captured.[4][9] The campaign of mass persecution in the newly acquired areas began immediately. In November 1939 the Soviet government ostensibly annexed the entire Polish territory under its control. Some 13.5 million Polish citizens who fell under the military occupation were made into new Soviet subjects following mock elections conducted by the NKVD secret police in the atmosphere of terror,[10][11] the results of which were used to legitimize the use of force. The Soviet campaign of ethnic cleansing began with the wave of arrests and summary executions of officers, policemen and priests.[Note 5][12][13] Over the next year and a half, the Soviet NKVD sent hundreds of thousands of people from eastern Poland to Siberia and other remote parts of the Soviet Union in four major waves of deportation between 1939 and 1941.[Note 6]"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_ ... _of_Poland

Polish are "racist"? What?

Auschwitz was built in annexed Polish territory, but not by Poland or its people. They fought until the end of the war, and suffered immense casualties. I do not understand this seeming intent on your part to marginalize them, paint them as racists or Nazi collaborators.

Neither will I judge all Europeans based on the actions of some. I am no "racist" nor the kind of thinker that paints with such broad brushes as to miss the details. Reality is in the details, and to preemptively judge someone based on their being of a certain ancestry or nationality is about the most insane and utter nonsense imaginable.

You claim Poland and Hungary resist Islamic immigration out of racism, rather than out of sensible nationalism and concern? What reason or evidence do you have for that? I see no reason to allow mass immigration of poor foreigners of different cultures and religions into any country, that leads predictably to demographic chaos and cultural war. The European people are generally against the mass immigration being FORCED upon them by their leaders. The real problem is three-fold: 1) corrupt leaders like Murk-hell and Macron who push mass immigration for many different reasons, all of them bad, 2) lack of free speech protections in European nations, leading to Big Brother societies, and 3) cultural Marxism and leftist ideology generally which has infected the minds of many people, many of them young people, but certainly does not have a grip over everyone.

I oppose those three things. Yet consider that despite all that, as I said, most Europeans oppose mass foreign immigration into their lands.

Simply because it accounts too many people as pertaining to one quality of humanity. There are too many Whites for the White Race to be worth much for a standard. To be a white supremacist or a black supremacist means to have lowered ones standards to a common denominator that is so common that it can't be expected to functionally produce high enough standards to actually exalt itself practically, as for example nationalism is capable of doing I the case of great nations. Nationalism is exclusivist, where racism is very generalist and holds with it no standard besides just being born from caucasian parents... which really isn't a very Spartan commandment at all. And commandments for type-exaltations need to be able to compare to Spartan standards, as Sparta is an attempt to resemble nature, as Judaism is as well, as of course the all-surpassing will called Pallas Athena, who since the days described by Homer to its downfall initiated by Sokrates in her bastardized name, has presided over the spirit of hardness that we call reason. As Sokrates is being defeated by the work of our generation, all other things fall away to this order, all standards less demanding must fall away for the West to retain any meaning whatsoever - we must purge. We must sacrifice all of our plebeian tendencies - and what are tendencies but beings, swaths of them, a frothy entitoid foam - to the islamic and nihilist forces of capital and ownership, and let Europe become a machine of oppression as an example of terror, of how not to live for the rest of the world. As the Eastern, Western and Southern extremities of the European world-map continue to flourish, all forces of death gather in the place where the Caesars made war, and the parodic end of history repeats itself faster and faster until the singularity comes in the form of a German slogan about efficiency, a Merkelian blurp of appeasement and low pay, entropy limited to its maximum within an open system.

Void - I laud your fighting for Poland and Hungary and those few people that are reasonable - I have no intention of limiting your sympathy for the forces you sympathize with. I just have given up looking for them in actual human form - I havent found them anywhere in Europe except in Greece itself. And Ive looked, Ive spent eight years driving around the continent for a see place where I could I've and build. All were infected with commerce and egalitarianism far worse than anywhere in the Americas. The very worst I found Madrid, by the way. But beneath all this utterly banal egalitarianism is an undisturbed core of old tribalistic stupidity. There is a reason for these world wars to have broken out in Europe, people were wretched enough to want them, to surrender to them, and for transcontinental slavetrade to have een invented by the Dutch - its not virtue that marks the European, it is only a particularly shrewd will to power. Ive seen into the castles, locks and craftsmanship of the Medieval Germans... that shocked me profoundly, to see how intricate the things they could make to entrap and mislead even then - and as for Poland and Hungary, I always base myself on a thorough intimacy with European history, especially the past century and what led up to it - I never trust what a people says in public - that is all crafted. I look at the things that transpired amidst them throughout our time. My grandfathers father took on a Polish name as he escaped the Czars, I have ties to the Polish spirit in a weird way, but my visit there did nothing to lift my gloom. I am not sorry, as I must judge as I see things.

Parodites was right, or it looks that way - America can restore its economic logic but Europe has lost it when it lost its colonies. Without them it can only implode. The World Wars were the first stage of that implosion, the postmodernist EU is a new phase of thinning out, preparing for the second implosion. Racism is a symptom of the depletion of honour and the loss of perspective on self valuing, it is the most banal form of recognition, completely cosmetic, apathetic, selfless.

Europe will become an instrument. To whom and to what end, that is yet to be determined, elsewhere.

Fixed Cross wrote:The point being here that Europe needs to die. The Ash and Elm extinction points to this also. The "White Race" as a European hub of life is gone.

Joker (Otto) and his banal superficiality, and all these skin deep puss-forms that masquerade as humans, the disastrous deprivation that they represent has bearing on the entire caucasian race; its standards have been lowered beyond the point of no return. In as far as heritage is concerned, it can only be purified by decimation.

There is no way forward for the white race. It is destroying itself from the inside out, slandering its most noble proponents with a degree of cowardice that hasn't ever existed in the history of mankind. The cowardice is enabled by the internet, and it is having its repercussions in the form of a destabilizing of the core. What nazism couldn't destroy for Odin, the internet racists are terminating.

Its fitting that the Ash-disease took hold around 2001, at the outset of the internet age. It looks like were going to have to ride this down until there is just a small pocket of seeds left, from which we can grow again.

- The Scorpion.

This coming from a guy who is about to have a Somalian son. Sorry, nobody can hear or listen you lecture about anything concerning the west again.

Baby Mohammed, happy fatherhood Fixed.

Last edited by Otto_West on Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.

I would speak of the death of Europe in order to galvanize Europeans to wake up and fight for themselves and their future, but I don't really see Europe simply imploding. Europe is too large and populous and diverse in its many countries to simply fall apart like that; what happens is that one or two small areas fall apart, and this causes the rest to recoil and brace themselves, to fortify where those who fell failed to fortify. Germany and Sweden are fucked beyond repair, and I'm sad to say this may also be true of France. But Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, former east bloc nations of course, Norway even, Britain, Austria, these are the places that will recoil once the collapse becomes more obviously undeniable in Germany, France and Sweden. I've been to Europe and I speak to people from there often, although I admit my perspective is still quite limited, but from what I see there is only the great possibility that the EU will fail and some European nations will return to saner nationalism, some will implode with chaos and collapse, and others will be Balkanized. Europe as a unified (not really, it never was) continent is what is coming apart, and a few of the more insane European nations; as for the rest of Europe, it will be fine. There is no longer any will for a land war nor the armies and military hardware to wage it, so at least that isn't a concern, although in a way that would probably lead to a faster resolution.

Turkey and Russia are wild cards, but I think Russia will simply reach out support to whichever European nations don't demonize Russia like we're still in s Cold War, especially the Eastern European nations will get nice overtures from Russia and also financial help once the EU collapses. Turkey, who the hell knows anymore with them. But a collapse of the EU and a return to sane nationalism and national sovereignty would put Turkey back in check.

That's the thing with distributed processing, and distributed political power, it is a natural check against cancer spreading very far. Free markets naturally isolate the cancer and contain it until it suffocates on its own.

I want to see mass deportations of any immigrants who came to Europe since 2015 and who have no education or marketable skills, who are welfare dependent, or who are in suspected terrorist lists. But of course that won't happen, and instead it will be war. I'm waiting for the next county to leave the EU. Greece should have been the first but the Eurotrash leaders pulled a sleight of hand threat and got Tsipras to turn traitor. So it fell to Britain instead.

Who is next? Just have to wait and see. The EU is probably the worst idea for continental Europe since Nazism.

Simply because it accounts too many people as pertaining to one quality of humanity. There are too many Whites for the White Race to be worth much for a standard. To be a white supremacist or a black supremacist means to have lowered ones standards to a common denominator that is so common that it can't be expected to functionally produce high enough standards to actually exalt itself practically, as for example nationalism is capable of doing I the case of great nations. Nationalism is exclusivist, where racism is very generalist and holds with it no standard besides just being born from caucasian parents... which really isn't a very Spartan commandment at all. And commandments for type-exaltations need to be able to compare to Spartan standards, as Sparta is an attempt to resemble nature, as Judaism is as well, as of course the all-surpassing will called Pallas Athena, who since the days described by Homer to its downfall initiated by Sokrates in her bastardized name, has presided over the spirit of hardness that we call reason. As Sokrates is being defeated by the work of our generation, all other things fall away to this order, all standards less demanding must fall away for the West to retain any meaning whatsoever - we must purge. We must sacrifice all of our plebeian tendencies - and what are tendencies but beings, swaths of them, a frothy entitoid foam - to the islamic and nihilist forces of capital and ownership, and let Europe become a machine of oppression as an example of terror, of how not to live for the rest of the world. As the Eastern, Western and Southern extremities of the European world-map continue to flourish, all forces of death gather in the place where the Caesars made war, and the parodic end of history repeats itself faster and faster until the singularity comes in the form of a German slogan about efficiency, a Merkelian blurp of appeasement and low pay, entropy limited to its maximum within an open system.

Yes, we all need to embrace the future like Fixed did and knock up a Somalian woman.

Embrace the future!

Last edited by Otto_West on Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.

This guy thinks America and U.K. are behind European countries giving up their borders and legal procedures for dealing with refugees. I'm not sure what I think of that, since he doesn't provide any evidence to support the claim other than conjecture, but he makes many other good points.

What all this amounts to are the death merchants of infinite economic growth that have reduced the west to mere economic materialism. In the early 2000's they knew that the birth death model in population of the west couldn't sustain itself with reproduction so very low and now if Swiss citizens die as an example the economic material notion is that we'll just replace them with Nigerians or something to that effect. A warm body is just a warm body after all in any kind of economic materialist model. What this economic materialism can't model is the unique cultures, ethnicities, traditions, and histories of people it is destroying but then again none of that can be quantified.

Essentially those that control the economies of the west don't care as their main concern is power and function where appearances are redundant to them. The only way forward is extreme resistance and violence. Peace is unattainable, peace is a lie.

Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.

This modern (postmodern) leftist ideology of multiculturalism thinks that all people are exactly the same and perfectly interchangeable from one culture to another, like pieces on a game board or something. It's nonsense. Also, the birth rate issue isn't even a problem, MIT did a study showing there is no correlation between an aging population and declining GDP.

"AbstractSeveral recent theories emphasize the negative effects of an aging population on economic growth, either because of the lower labor force participation and productivity of older workers or because aging will create an excess of savings over desired investment, leading to secular stagnation. We show that there is no such negative relationship in the data. If anything, coun- tries experiencing more rapid aging have grown more in recent decades. We suggest that this counterintuitive finding might reflect the more rapid adoption of automation technologies in countries undergoing more pronounced demographic changes, and provide evidence and theo- retical underpinnings for this argument." http://economics.mit.edu/files/12536

But if you want more kids in your society, maybe try to actually value that in your own people, rather than taking the Marxist route of attempting to destroy the family unit and destroy women by turning them into irresponsible, self-hating, kid-hating feminists.

Fixed Cross wrote:All EU countries are typically ruled or co-ruled by Socialist parties.They don't always carry the term, but their policies are invariably relentlessly top down regulative of peoples morals and money.

This is about all I could find (so far). There is a map of the situation at the beginning of 2017. In the meantime, France's Socialist Party has imploded and is no longer in government. You are right that many parties that don't call themselves Socialist or Communist are nevertheless Left or Centre-Left. Clearly that applies to Social-Democrats or Labourists. These have severed or never had links with Real Socialism as historically has been seen in Europe, and quite generally are minority members of coalitions. I maintain that their presence does not qualifies those governments as 'leftist'. But that, ultimately, depends on where you draw the line. If anything that is not Lepen or Wilders (who, by the way, has an Indonesian mother) is leftist, including parties belonging to ALDE or PPE, then, OK, your statement can't be objected.

Fixed Cross wrote:This is precisely why Europe has turned into an intellectual ghost world. There is only "Care", which means prevention of freedom.

Generally, I find these non-leftist parties not so intellectually conspicuous. They have proved to be unable to elaborate models that are not helpless remakes of past formulas that today translate only into isolationism. Not even Switzerland does that. And "care" was anything but absent in fascist regimes. But, OK, I guess you mean something else. Nevertheless, I suspect that leftist intellectuals would claim that the ghost world began exactly when they lost the upper hand, roughly since the eighties. Personally I believe that this claim shows very well why they lost the upper hand, together with the bottomless hubris of self-styling themselves as the only possible dignified thinkers, but it does not mean they are entirely wrong.

Fixed Cross wrote:Italy and France are typically robustly Communist. Holland has been ruled by the proudly Socialist PvdA since after WWII. All of Scandinavia is Socialist, isn't it?

As for the latin 'Communists', I believe you are being too kind. The parties in themselves deserved indeed some respect until a generation ago, the old leaders were tough, rough yet decent people. Not their voters... These are the same who now engulf the ballots with votes for the populists. They have never seen politics and their parties as anything but lobbing, a way to reap a lot of "care" for themselves, while being dispensed of any care for their communities and their very sons (which, by the way, the begot only seldom). This is where I think you mistake Socialism for something else. Socialism was then (because no longer is), what populism is now. The promise of a niche of inflated affluence for the happy fews who hold imaginary rights (assuming that there may be rights that are not imaginary). It was the rights of the workers then (and back then they were not exactly few), it has become the priority of the nationals now (also because they generally no longer work). This attitude has been decisive for Brexit, it was the ruthless (and ineffective) elimination of a social competitor. If they really were still socialists, they would have cornered a government who offset the cost of the crisis on their shoulders. Instead they simply worked in order to have a bigger slice of the residual cake, with a naif reasoning that now appears fatally flawed, for now UK's economy is halting while the inflation is on the rise.

Fixed Cross wrote:Germany has the most Socialist policies of all, and of course it is where Socialism first took hold.

It might be as you say. Still the Kanzlerin would not exactly agree, I guess you can give me that. I think the German government implemented this 'generous' policy for two reasons: a) a considersable commercial surplus and the need to boost the internal market, have some inflation (which is a word that curls the toes of Germans, and yet they needed it) and possibly compensate a setback on their exports (which they do not even need in the end); b) defuse the populists, which they achieved successfully. This can explain only the contingent case. In more general terms, welfare in my view is the only sovereign activity nation-state governemnts can still (think to) manage. As for the rest, they have almost no say on global economy, or on "globalization" tout court, and they can't steer that unless they become part of larger governance schemes. Sure, there is a whole range of degrees of influence, yet not even the US can afford the alternative. (The ECB would prove me wrong in a way, but... really?).

Fixed Cross wrote:Switzerland has Socialism, so does Austria.

As of now, Switzerland is faring with a kind of Grosse Koalition (if I understood that correctly, because I never wanted to know anything about the Swiss government before today). None of the ruling parties has the name Socialist, but there is a Social-Democratic party. It looks similar in Austria, but the Social-Democrats should be the first party. Nevertheless these Austrian leftists do believe in borders, or so it seems.

Fixed Cross wrote:Which country in Europe is not socialist? Arguably, England has some non socialist tendencies, for the rest we d have to look at Monaco, of which I don't know the laws, and Liechtenstein and Andorra.

If you mean the governments, that would be Belgium, Hungary, Poland... Even Norway.

Fixed Cross wrote:Yes, Europe is dead.

Europe as we know it, as we have been taught to know it, probably is. And, given some common readings of ours, isn't that what we already knew?I mean, the man thought that the situation was already compromised by the massive urbanisation at the end of the XIX century... And was Socialism the cause or the effect? "Necessity at work"...

Last edited by attano on Mon Jul 24, 2017 8:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.